Gov't: 23K workers affected by Gulf oil drill ban

RightinNYC said:

It's not that you got anything wrong, it's that you don't appear to understand why that's entirely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

i needed to read it again, you insisted, despite your acknowledgment that i had not gotten anything wrong in my presentation
notice how that makes no sense

Obama's moratorium was on 1) deep water 2) drilling.
This incident 1) did not involve deep water 2) or drilling.

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.

Click to expand...

i agree with you. what is so hard to understand about these words when put together?
oil rig
explosion
gulf of mexico

Pressed for details on the oil rig explosion, a representative of the company said they did not know what caused the incident. Mariner Energy’s Patrick Cassidy told the AP, “The platform is still intact and it was just a small portion of the platform that appears to be burned.” The platform had seven active production wells but they were shut down right right before the incident.

Click to expand...

Mariner Energy Oil Rig Explosion: Another Threat to Global Warming, Climate Change? | All247News

Imagine that Congress passed a law banning the consumption of alcohol because it leads to drunk driving. I march in the streets to protest that law. On the way home from that rally, I answer my phone while driving and crash into a pole. Using your logic, the fact that I crashed is proof that prohibition is necessary.

Click to expand...

now i see the problem. you are unable to construct an accurate analogy. that is what causes you to be unable to wrap your head around the irony of this circumstance

let's do imagine that congress banned the production of alcohol because its customers were adversely affected by the uncontrollable fumes emanating from the leaking bottles
and the alcohol spirit producer publicly campaigned against the government's moratorium of its alcohol production, whining that the moratorium was not in the public's interest
the very next day, that alcohol producer's manufacturing facility again generated a batch of alcohol which made its way into the public domain, potentially adversely affecting the citizens

again, i am making it as simple as possible for you. but remember Einstein's words: "make things as simple as possible but not simpler". heeding Einstein, i refuse to make this "simpler"

justabubba said:

i needed to read it again, you insisted, despite your acknowledgment that i had not gotten anything wrong in my presentation
notice how that makes no sense

i agree with you. what is so hard to understand about these words when put together?
oil rig
explosion
gulf of mexico

Click to expand...

First, this wasn't a rig. Second, I'm not sure why you're proud of the fact that you hear "explosion" and "gulf of mexico" and suddenly lose the ability to read beyond there and comprehend what's actually happening.

let's do imagine that congress banned the production of alcohol because its customers were adversely affected by the uncontrollable fumes emanating from the leaking bottles
and the alcohol spirit producer publicly campaigned against the government's moratorium of its alcohol production, whining that the moratorium was not in the public's interest
the very next day, that alcohol producer's manufacturing facility again generated a batch of alcohol which made its way into the public domain, potentially adversely affecting the citizens

Click to expand...

Except the moratorium in question had nothing to do with the alcohol producer's facility. And the incident at the facility had nothing to do with the harm that was anticipated.

RightinNYC said:

First, this wasn't a rig. Second, I'm not sure why you're proud of the fact that you hear "explosion" and "gulf of mexico" and suddenly lose the ability to read beyond there and comprehend what's actually happening.

Click to expand...

here is the cite from eight hours ago (which was proffered in my prior post):
Mariner Energy Oil Rig Explosion: Another Threat to Global Warming, Climate Change? | All247News
allow me to excerpt another:

A day before the fire, the American Petroleum Institute held a "Rally for Jobs" in Houston to protest the drilling moratorium. Mariner official Barbara Dianne Hagood was among those in attendance, according to a Financial Times report.

Click to expand...

The Associated Press: What now for Gulf? Fire complicates drill debate

Except the moratorium in question had nothing to do with the alcohol producer's facility. And the incident at the facility had nothing to do with the harm that was anticipated.

Click to expand...

yes, it has become apparent your ability to understand analogies is not very sound
the moratorium did impose restrictions on the alcohol producers, and their facilities
and the recurrence of potentially harmful emissions from the alcohol producer's bottles was exactly the kind of potential harm the moratorium was intended to prevent

justabubba said:

here is the cite from eight hours ago (which was proffered in my prior post)

Click to expand...

Ah, well if some guy from "all247news.com" refers to it as a rig, that means that everyone else MUST be wrong.

Second of all, Deepwater Horizon was a rig, which drills wells, while yesterday's Mariner Energy incident was on a platform. Platforms place pressure on the wells to keep oil flowing and sometimes collect the oil or gas itself, and are in place for years at a time.

Click to expand...

Calm Down People: Factchecking Thursday’s Oil Fire in the Gulf - TIME NewsFeed

The Associated Press: What now for Gulf? Fire complicates drill debate

Click to expand...

You really don't appear to be understanding what I'm saying, because I'm not arguing that this company wasn't opposed to the moratorium. I'm pointing out that this had not a goddamn thing to do with the moratorium.

yes, it has become apparent your ability to understand analogies is not very sound
the moratorium did impose restrictions on the alcohol producers, and their facilities
and the recurrence of potentially harmful emissions from the alcohol producer's bottles was exactly the kind of potential harm the moratorium was intended to prevent

Click to expand...

And exactly what restrictions did the deep water drilling moratorium place on this shallow water platform?

(Hint: "The Mariner Energy platform does not violate a government moratorium on deepwater drilling, since no drilling took place and the platform is in shallow water.")

Calm Down People: Factchecking Thursday’s Oil Fire in the Gulf - TIME NewsFeed

ok, so your position is that since the latest oil rig explosion was not in deep waters that we should no longer be concerned about assuring the safe operations of oil rigs in the gulf
even if the oil rigs owned by corporations protesting the moratorium are the ones doing the exploding
makes no sense, but then i recognize that is not unusual in your stated positions
yea, go with that

justabubba said:

ok, so your position is that since the latest oil rig explosion was not in deep waters that we should no longer be concerned about assuring the safe operations of oil rigs in the gulf
even if the oil rigs owned by corporations protesting the moratorium are the ones doing the exploding

Click to expand...

No, my position is that it would be foolish to argue that a fire on a shallow water platform that resulted in no spill is in the same ballpark as a catastrophic spill on a deep water drilling rig. I explained that the two were very different. You struggled with the concept for a while, but now that you appear to be getting it, you're changing your argument. Nevertheless, as I mentioned before, the two incidents are not even in the same ballpark.

RightinNYC said:

No, my position is that it would be foolish to argue that a fire on a shallow water platform that resulted in no spill is in the same ballpark as a catastrophic spill on a deep water drilling rig. I explained that the two were very different. You struggled with the concept for a while, but now that you appear to be getting it, you're changing your argument. Nevertheless, as I mentioned before, the two incidents are not even in the same ballpark.

Click to expand...

i hear you
your illogic is recognizable at a distance
you want to ignore that the same organizations that opposed a drilling moratorium are the ones which own the rig that most recently exploded
in gulf waters

justabubba said:

identify the part i got wrong


that the Obama administration has chosen a wise governmental practice to impose a moratorium to assure that off shore drilling procedures are safe and adequately monitored before enabling additional oil drilling incidents to occur in the gulf
recognize that the very organizations which campaigned against such precautionary measures are the ones we now see experiencing oil drilling incidents
i have made this observation as simple as is possible in the hopes you will now be able to grasp it

Click to expand...

What you got wrong, is that you called the production platform a drilling rig.

apdst said:

What you got wrong, is that you called the production platform a drilling rig.

Click to expand...

tell us what exploded, a drilling rig or a drilling platform

then tell us if that semantic difference is significant to the points made

justabubba said:

tell us what exploded, a drilling rig or a drilling platform

Click to expand...

Neither! It was a production platform.

then tell us if that semantic difference is significant to the points made

Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with semantics; it's to do with facts. A drilling rig and production platform are two different animals.

kathaksung said:

Who is behind Gulf oil leaking?

BP originates from “The National Iranian Oil Company” in 1953, and was ousted from Iran in 1979. When US wants to start a war in Iran, they need again the ally of the Great Britain like what they had when Bush started Iraq invasion. But the poddle of Tony Blair is not at the seat. To extort Britain to join the coming Iran war, the Gulf oil spill was created to shake the foundation of the BP. To save BP from the financial trouble – joining the Iran war.

Quote, “

Click to expand...

It was a sabotage.

Somebody knew in advance. It was meant to happen. That’s why Goldman Sachs, Halliburton and BP’s Chief, all could make money on it.

'And The Sea Shall Turn To Blood'...
By David Icke
The David Icke Newsletter
6-27-10

Mother Jones magazine reported:

'Tony Buzbee, a lawyer representing 15 rig workers and dozens of shrimpers, seafood restaurants, and dock workers, says he has obtained a three-page signed statement from a crew member on the boat that rescued the burning rig's workers.

The sailor, who Buzbee refuses to name for fear of costing him his job, was on the ship's bridge when Deepwater Horizon installation manager Jimmy Harrell, a top employee of rig owner Transocean, was speaking with someone in Houston via satellite phone.

Buzbee told Mother Jones that, according to this witness account, Harrell was screaming, "Are you @#$%&! happy? Are you @#$%&! happy? The rig's on fire! I told you this was gonna happen.'

Yes, and nothing was done because it was meant to happen.

'And The Sea Shall Turn To Blood'...

U.K. kneeling down (10/4/2010)
BP oil rig in Gulf was damaged in April 20, 2010. I alleged it was sabotage because big heads all knew in advance. Goldman Sachs, BP’s Chief all sold their BP stocks days before the case broken. Halliburton also bought an oil clean-up company just a week before the rig collapsing. Everything follows the steps of 911 sabotage when there was a “Bin Laden trading” of stock which made money on the coming 911 attack. The insiders are experts to take advantage on their plot.

BP was not able to stop the oil leaking in following month. The pressure increased on U.K.. Watch the time table:

6/12, “ UK PM to visit Washington next month |

Reuters
Sat, Jun 12 . Obama tells Britain: BP must pay economic claims

UK PM Cameron to visit Washington next month | Reuters “

U.K. finally bent to the pressure. High ranking ruling class signaled compromise. Queen Elizabeth visited Washington.

7/7, “Queen Elizabeth addresses U.N. for first time since 1957

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Queen Elizabeth addresses U.N. for first time since 1957 “

Deal was made. Extortion stopped.

7/15, “BP says oil has stopped leaking into Gulf of Mexico
The well has been sealed for the first time since April, using a cap which engineers are now monitoring to see if it holds

David Batty and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 15 July 2010 “

Secret deal was confirmed. U.K. will join the war on Iran.

7/21, “ U.K. - U.S. relationship thaws
By Helene Cooper
New York Times

Washington - It was not quite the Tony Blair-Bill Clinton love fest of 1997, but President Barack Obama and the newly minted British prime minister, David Cameron, appeared game to do everything they could Tuesday to take some of the recent chill out of the relationship between their countries. “

Cameron will follow its predecessor to help the U.S. to continue its “war on terror” in Mid-east. Interesting thing is the media even dare not to say Tony Blair- George Bush love fest but replaced it with Bill Clinton because that would otherwise reveal its attention - Cameron would join Obama in War on Iran, just like Blair joined Bush in War on Iraq.

The White House has shovel-ready jobs for any citizen that can stand the stench of bull****.

Goldman Sachs knew Gulf oil leak in advance.

Quote, "

No joke: Goldman Sachs shorted Gulf of Mexico

It turns out that Goldman Sachs really did place shorts on TransOcean stock days before the explosions rocked the rig in the Gulf of Mexico sending stocks plunging while GS profits soared -- benefitting once again from a huge disaster, having done the same with airline stocks prior to 911 then again with the housing bubble.
by Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News

On Apr. 30, the Huffington Post published a story stating:
In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made "a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico" one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.

The new revelations came to light after government investigators turned up new emails from Goldman employee Fabrice "Fabulous Fab" Tourre in which he bragged to a girlfriend that the firm was taking a "big short" position on the Gulf.

No joke: Goldman Sachs shorted Gulf of Mexico

Click to expand...

It is through these CEO, Feds rule this country. That's why these CEO can always harvest fat bonus and pension, despite it's good year or bad one. Even the company is bankrupted, they left with a full pocket. When they were ousted from a company, they just get another CEO job in a different firm. Because they work for the interest of the ruling class, not for the interest of small share holders or company employers. And those CEO agents now are pushed to take the seats to run the government. The typical representatives we see: Bloomburg, Meg Whitman, Fiorina.....

BP chief Tony Hayward sold shares weeks before oil spill

The chief executive of BP sold ¡ê1.4 million of his shares in the fuel giant weeks before the Gulf of Mexico oil spill caused its value to collapse.
By Jon Swaine and Robert Winnett
Published: 12:10AM BST 05 Jun 2010

Tony Hayward cashed in about a third of his holding in the company one month before a well on the Deepwater Horizon rig burst, causing an environmental disaster.
Mr Hayward, whose pay package is ¡ê4?million a year, then paid off the mortgage on his family¡¯s mansion in Kent, which is estimated to be valued at more than ¡ê1.2?million.

There is no suggestion that he acted improperly or had prior knowledge that the company was to face the biggest setback in its history.

BP chief Tony Hayward sold shares weeks before oil spill - Telegraph

Click to expand...

apdst said:

So, tell us again, why did we bail out the UAW and the banks?

Click to expand...

Because neither one of those is overpaid. :lol:

I wrote about those CEO eight years ago. Who affected 23k workers?

57. FBI's interest

On Jan. 31, 2001,(the first wave of attack on my thread) one web site I failed to post was Foxnews.com. It's a big firm. So the level of moderator was high too, I suppose. Perhaps they were unwilling to shut down my thread without proper reason. They simply shut down the forum. A message said that "If you are looking for the Foxnews.com and Fox News Channel community message boards, they have been temporarily disabled while we build a new and easier to use format. We'll have them up and running again as soon as we can." This is obviously cover words. The format they had used was a good one which is using now by big firm such like WashingtonPost.com, ..... The promised 'new and easier to use format' never come true. From time to time I went there, found the page of 'temporarily shut down' was still the same, with threads posted on last day (dated Jan. 31) laying there, showed shut down took place abruptly.

Shut down a prosperous message board was by no means an insignificant event. It hurt Fox's fame and popularity. The decision must be from top ranking. It also helped me to strengthen a belief of how FBI control this country.

I learnt that Walter Disney was an informant of FBI. He died in 1960's. I think there were many VIP informant like him worked for FBI. In early 1990, I believe a helicopter accident was a result of a conspiracy of selection for CEO of Disneyland. I had a puzzle then. Whoever selected a CEO would be co-operate with FBI. Why did they select with violence? Unless they needed one whom was more than an informant, that was, a candidate of their own. Walt Disney was an informant, but once he was required to do something which was conflict to the interest of Disneyland, what would he do? He might choose to protect the interest of Disneyland.

HP and Compaq's emerge is a good example of the difference of a CEO and an owner (I can't find proper word for it. I mean someone who has real interest in business.) HP CEO Fiorina proposed to emerge with Compaq, HP heir Hewlett opposes the deal. Fiorina wants to make HP the biggest PC manufacturer. Hewlett think it's too risk to emerge with a rotten business. I think Hewlett is real care for HP's interest. That's because he has big financial interest in HP. (18% of HP's stock) And he has personal feeling on HP. It's a company set up by his father. Same thing like W. Disney to Disneyland. If the deal is a failure, CEO's loss will be much less than him. And she may become a CEO of another big firm.

Through Disneyland's story, I have a feeling that 40 years ago, FBI got VIP of big firm as their informant. 30 years later, they are not satisfy with this, they need a representative of their own interest.
(I have no intention to link HP and Compaq's emerge with FBI at all. It's different from the shut down of message board of Foxnews. I only use it as reference to show that CEO's decision could hurt the company they work for. )


83. Spy country (8/21)

When I started my thread in internet, a message told me, the content of " The newspaper titled: " Heroin bust called U.S. record".(See San Jose Mercury, 6-22-1991)." is a day off...

Quote, "You cited the wrong date! Although the rest of your newspaper and highway information (in Bay Area holds up). "
He gave me an URL to check:

http://nl13.newsbank.com/nlsite/region_pgs/ca_search.htm

I thus knew my article was under scrutiny. I live in San Jose. I read San Jose Mercury News. Most news reference were from it.

Some people doubted that when I said Walt Disney was an informant. (#29. "I'm you, American")

Question, quote, "What was Walt informing on? Mickey's communist ties? Goofy's drug problems? Minnie's prostitution busts? "

With above URL, choose S.J.M.N, with appropriate key words and time, you can find news I referred.

Quote,"But most disturbing,....is the allegation that Disney was an FBI informant, recruited by J. Edgar Hoover to snitch on employees and Hollywood colleagues in exchange for favors....."
See whole story in "THE AUTHOR WAS WALT DISNEY A WICKED WITCH? OR IS THIS MAN GOOFY?" San Jose Mercury News, 8/1/1993.

In Chinese newspaper "World Journal"(5/7/93, page 3A) talked about this too. W.Disney was FBI's informant from 1940 to 1966 when he passed away. It also talked about former President Ronno Reagan was a FBI informant, code 'T-10', when he was president of Actor and Actress Association(translation) in 1947.

Are these the only informants FBI have had? Of course not. FBI titled W. Disney "Full Special Agent in Charge Contact" in 1954. It's 50 years passed, a net of surveillance should have been developed already. And in addition to this informant net, we can see there is another army of FBI: retired FBI. They are still the eye and ear and hand of the Bureau. And they used to occupy important position. Such like Ornell, who became Chief in charge of security of WTC after retirement. Still they say they are outnumbered in war on terror. They want recruit one million more TIPS. A spy country that Gestapo and KGB have ever dreamed of. A monstrous power that almost equal to Defense Department. But it's not used to defend US citizens, it's used to spy on them.